Re: Bug#308584: kernel-source-2.4.27: missing sysctl slot for ia64 results in local DoS
On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 02:00:13AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 00:22 -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 18:30 +0900, Horms wrote:
> > > Package: kernel-source-2.4.27
> > > Version: 2.4.27-10
> > > Severity: important
> > > Tags: patch, security, pending
> > > I got this from Moritz Muehlenhoff <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> > > http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2005-284.html This is
> > > CAN-2005-0137 : Linux kernel 2.6 on Itanium (ia64) architectures
> > > allows local users to cause a denial of service via a "missing
> > > Itanium syscall table entry."
> > > On investigation I found that
> > > 2.4.27 is vulnerable to this. 2.6.8 and 2.6.11 are not.
> > > The bug has been fixed upstream for both 2.4 and 2.6 and
> > > I have put a this patch into SVN for 2.4.27
> > Actually, this fix is already in kernel-patch-2.4.27-ia64 (2.4.27-3).
> > It was included when I resync'd with upstream; I didn't include a
> > reference in the changelog because I was unsure if the CAN ID was public
> > yet.
> > kernel-patch-2.4.27-ia64 has already made its way into sarge, and:
> > <vorlon> anyway, yeah, 2.4 kernels are also being synced up; I've already approved 2.4.27-8 in for ia64
> > 2.4.27-8 was built against -3, so it sounds like this fix should already
> > be going in.
> Testing a build against 2.4.27-10, I noticed that both patches will
> apply. Since they both add a syscall slot, we silently get one extra
> syscall slot :/ I'm unsure how severe of a problem this is - but I fear
> it may introduce a DoS vector of its own.
> I think the best solution at this point is to build a
> kernel-patch-2.4.27-ia64 (2.4.27-4) that reverts this change and prepare
> a kernel-image along with it, therefore requiring no changes to
> kernel-source-2.4.27. What do you think?
> Release Team: If I get these 2 builds into sid can we move these into
> sarge with the other kernel updates?